Page 2 of the Saudi Gazette, Five 'thinks' about George W. Bush. Photo by Silva

by Mark Silva

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia – President Bush has received a royal welcome here – dining on artichokes and more at the Saudi palace last night and dining again tonight at the royal ranch where King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud keeps 150 stallions.

But their confidential conversations are not without strain – with Bush allowing today that he will be tackling the question of high oil prices, and the impact they have on the American economy – in his private talks with the monarch tonight.

And the Saudi Gazette – a leading English language newspaper in Riyadh, and an independent publication which nevertheless has Saudi princes for investors and must submit its appointment of an editor for government approval – welcomed the visiting American today with a Page 2 cartoon of a cowboy-hatted Bush, his boot pressing hard against a lassoed, rocky globe, with the Persian Gulf region foremost in his noose.

“The following are Arab street perceptions, right or wrong, about U.S. President George W. Bush,’’ the newspaper announces in its Five “thinks’ about George W. Bush today, played in a prominent place that the paper reserves for five-things comments each day.

“Bush, a born-again Christian, is the strongest and staunchest supporter of the Israeli state and Zionists in particular,’’ the paper reports. “During his rule, the Israeli Zionist cabal in Washington, or ‘neo-cons,’ as they are also known, managed to influence and command U.S. foreign policy.’’ That’s “think’’ No. 1.

Think No. 2: “Bush is the one U.S. president under whose term Arab-American relations fell to an abysmal low, so also Arab-Muslim relations. His infamous reference to a ‘crusade’ against terrorism rang alarm bells across the world. The singular gaffe – among several now legendary ones that mark his presidency – raised fears that the 9/11 terrorist attacks could spark a ‘clash of civilizations’ between Christians and Muslims, sowing fresh winds of hatred and mistrust.’’

Think No. 3: “Bush’s presidency gave cause for the majority in the Arab Street to believe, rightly or wrongly and for once, that the United States is anti-Arab and anti-Muslim.’’

Think No. 4: “Worse, Bush’s presidency raked up issues for the Arab Street to widely believe that the Arab World’s real enemy is the U.S. government and not Israel.’’

Think No. 5: “Bush’s foreign policy of invasions and threats consumed so much of the world’s energy that oil prices managed to hit $100 a barrel and create for the first time since the first oil spike in 1973 a problem of plenty in the coffers of producing nations.’’

It wasn’t readily known what Bush might think of this, or even if he had read the glossy morning paper at the royal guest palace where he and his entourage spent the night. But this morning, the president was introducing himself at a breakfast of businessmen, and offering a preview of what he plans to take up with the king today, during his second day of talks here.

He held his meeting with 11 entrepreneurs, including a stockbroker and lawyer, at the American embassy in Riyadh.

“I'm George W. Bush, president of the United States,’’ Bush said to laughter in the room – (the White House’s annotation).

“It's important for the president to hear thoughts, hopes, dreams, aspirations, concerns from folks that are out making a living,’’ Bush said here. “And I really appreciate you taking time out of your day to come and visit with me.’’

“One thing that's for certain: The United States benefits when people come to my country,’’ Bush told his hosts. “And one of my concerns was after September the 11th that our visa policy, particularly for Saudis, was tightened to the point where we missed opportunity to show young and old alike what our country is really about. I love the fact that some of you were educated in America.

“We share the same God,’’ Bush told them, “and we share the same aspirations for children and for our futures.’’

The president, who dined with the king last night and then entered both group and private meetings that lasted until 11 pm local time – pretty late for what the White House spokesman calls “our early-to-bed president’’ – reported on those talks today.

“I've got very close relations with His Majesty,’’ Bush said. “We had a good visit last night on a variety of subjects.

“We talked about Palestinian peace; we talked about the security issues of the region,’’ he said. “I talked to the ambassador and will again talk to His Majesty tonight about the fact that oil prices are very high, which is tough on our economy, and that I would hope, as OPEC considers different production levels, that they understand that if their -- one of their biggest consumers' economy suffers, it will mean less purchases, less oil and gas sold.

“So we've got a lot of things to talk about, but I want to assure you it's from the spirit of friendship,’’ Bush told his hosts. “And the hospitality last night was warm, and the conversation was excellent -- just like this one is going to be. ‘’

Comments

Wow. Get so caught up in the campaign that I forget why we're doing this. Thanks for the reminder, Saudi Gazette!

Remember, the cowboys were the "good guys." And Bush is a good guy whose goal is to promote democracy in countries that have never known its benefits for
the population. An impossible hope? Well, as Mr. Obama said the other day, to paraphrase, what is life without hope? What if President Kennedy had said, "We can't send a man to the Moon. Let's not even try." Go Cowboy!

The difference between the Islamic World insulting someone else's religion is that unlike the Islamo-Fascists in Europe and other places, the Christians and Jews of the world will NOT go on some idotic rampage, burning buildings, burning cars, issuing death threats against those who "defame Judiasim" etc.

I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence.
Nov. 6, 2000George W. Bush
Let me tell you what else I'm worried about: I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place. (more)

I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation building.
Oct. 11, 2000George W. Bush
Somalia. It started off as a humanitarian mission then changed into a nation-building mission and that's where the mission went wrong. The mission was changed. And as a result, our nation paid a price, and so I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation building. I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win war. I think our troops ought to be used to help overthrow a dictator when it's in our best interests. But in this case, it was a nation-building exercise. And same with Haiti. I wouldn't have supported either. (more)

A nation-building corps from America. Absolutely not.
Oct. 11, 2000George W. Bush
I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean we're going to have kind of a nation-building corps from America. Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do and when it gets overextended, morale drops. (more)

He [Gore] believes in nation building. I would be very careful ...
Oct. 4, 2000George W. Bush (Presidential debate, Oct. 4, 2000)
I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in national building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. (

Some things change and things changed after 9/11. For historical purposes, the U.S. was involved in nation-building after WWII, in Germany and in Japan. Look at the outcomes today, two peaceful allies.
The nation-building of Iraq and Afghanistan are to develop peaceful allies against Islamic extremism.
Anyway, you weirdo Lefties were all for nation-building in Somalia, Haiti, Kosovo, Bosnia. Could it be your support of nation-building depends on who is president and from what party?
The surge is working in Iraq. And now, political reconciliation is occurring in Iraq, something one-noter Doug Zook keeps desiring. So, we are succeeding over there. Wee have moderate Palestinians talking with the Israeli government about peace. Looks to me like Bush's efforts are paying off and succeeding, something you folks do not want.
The Left is not in favor of long-lasting peace. The Left is not in favor of freedom. The Left is not in favor of stopping genocide. The Left is not in favor of anything good. The Left does want mayhem and destruction, genocide and evil dictators. The Left loves and supports Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Kim Jong Il, Saddam Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Like I say, the Left is the worst mankind has to offer.

"Remember, the cowboys were the "good guys." And Bush is a good guy whose goal is to promote democracy in countries that have never known its benefits for
the population. An impossible hope? Well, as Mr. Obama said the other day, to paraphrase, what is life without hope? What if President Kennedy had said, "We can't send a man to the Moon. Let's not even try." Go Cowboy!

Posted by: Jake | January 15, 2008 7:45 AM"

Promoting democracy for a populace who has never known its benefits is a good thing WHEN THE POPULACE WANTS IT. It's a mistake for us to go into ANY country and tell them what their government ought to be. This is a lesson we should have learned from Vietnam.

And I'm in agreement with JT about the unfortunate use of "cowboy" to automatically code "good guy." Life isn't a John Ford western. Never was.

Anyway, you weirdo Lefties were all for nation-building in Somalia, Haiti, Kosovo, Bosnia. Could it be your support of nation-building depends on who is president and from what party?
____________________________
Change Lefties to righties and the case is the same. Except THIS Leftie was opposed to those excellent adventures in Somalia, Haiti, Kosovo, Bosnia.

The Iraqi situation need never have degenerated into the tragedy it became had civilized nations, including moderate Arabic/Islamic states, found the courage to help the U.S. combat the enemy, who early on demonstrated the cutthroat (literally) terrorists they are. Especially bothersome has been the lack of outrage expressed and ineffective action taken by mainstream Muslims against the radicals who hijacked the religion of Islam for such destructive and bloody purposes.

Iraq became essentially and unnecessarily a United States war. Despite the mistakes--the miscalculations made in the U.S.'s preemptive strike, including its go-it-alone arrogance--once the barbaric nature of the enemy and the danger of a destabilized Iraq became so obvious, virtually all of America's "allies" remained on the sidelines, as they do today.

It doesn't require the brainpower of the proverbial rocket scientist to imagine what would have, and should have, occurred if these other nations would have found the courage to help stabilize Iraq--political and financial benefits for all. But it's been too late for too long. How tragic and shameful.

Please visit my blog spot to see how I have worked against organized crime and terrorism in India wafting in perfume bottles of Aurangzeb's grave ,the new Taj Mahal that he had built for his old wife ;
from terror regimes of Palestine Liberation Organization.http://bhatiyajantatalji.blogspot.com/

Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)